I really found this post to be disturbing in its callousness and disregard towards illegal immigrants, particularly children. If a child is brought to the US by parents and through some circumstance end up with illegal status what do you propose be done about this cougar? round em' up and ship them home? There are children that have gone through this, so many in fact that Congress is attempting to pass a bill called the Dream Act which has bipartisan support. This law would recognize that many people were brought here as minors and should not be punished for their parents actions. It would grant conditional permanent resident status as a path towards citizenship. I'd also like to point out the not-so-subtle racism of your comments, for some reason you equate immigrants with people of color, namely those from Africa and South America. It is not surprising that recruitment for white supremacist organizations spiked during the public debate on immigration. You have no idea how difficult it is to live as an undocumented child in this country, the fear of deportation to a place that you barely know, if at all, is terrifying. Poverty makes it very difficult to afford the legal services required to hire a lawyer to address immigration status,and without status you can't get a good job...it is a vicious cycle. and the longer you wait the worse off you are. If you end up being ordered deported as a child it becomes nearly impossible to reverse the decision. Yet again you have no power over this because of your status as a minor. Before you start a thread attacking the ability of immigrants to obtain an education take the time to think what it would be like to have done nothing wrong yet have no power to control your destiny to improve your life through education. Allowing illegal immigrants to receive in state tuition doesn't even mean they will attend because without financial aid the expense is a burden for most immigrant families. If they do go they will need private loans, again very difficult for immigrants to receive. in any case the point is to have a more complicated understanding of the lives and experiences of people, i hope its possible for you to do so.

a primary reason people come to this country illegally is to give their children a better life.

seeing that the children are the end goal and motivation, while the parents illegal actions are the mechanism to reach this goal, it seems reasonable to take steps and reduce the primary motivation behind the illegal acts.

In case you are confused as to what precisely could be construed as callous in your position, perhaps you should consider that here you argue for punishing children based on the actions of their parents. Perhaps you are confused as to the definition of callous? If not please accept the fact that punitive measures taken against children as a way to prevent illegal immigration could be defined as callous. Also please tell me what you propose be done, perhaps Schoolchild Security task forces (aka SS) could raid kindergartens across the country rounding up undocumented children. Surely this would send a message to those who seek to leech off the system by providing a better life for their kids.

Slow down on that one. In some states, education *is* recognized as a right in the state constitution. Remember, rights are not granted by the states, but recognized and protected. Thus, if the state recognizes a right (not privilege) of education, they don't have a ground to deny it to illegal aliens. The right to an education is one they get simply for being human beings and the state will protect that right by allowing them into the schools just as it allows anyone else.

There are also fundamental rights under the federal, U.S. Constitution, which includes a right to travel. This is a right granted to all citizens of the U.S. An undocumented alien doesn't have that right under the constitution, because it is expressly reserved for citizens. However, to deny them that right the state would have to provide due process, which is a fundamental right due to all human beings in the jurisdiction. So, the state may have made a judgment call and decided that there are public policy benefits to providing an affordable education to everyone who resides in the state vs. spending the money on a series of hearings to satisfy due process to deny education to undocumented aliens.

In some states, education *is* recognized as a right in the state constitution. Remember, rights are not granted by the states, but recognized and protected.

I am too busy to read the entire thread at the moment, but I am intrigued by the bolded part of your comment. I happen to agree that rights are recognized and protected by governments, not created by them. I thought this was a significant point and worth highlighting.

I really found this post to be disturbing in its callousness and disregard towards illegal immigrants, particularly children. If a child is brought to the US by parents and through some circumstance end up with illegal status what do you propose be done about this cougar? round em' up and ship them home? There are children that have gone through this, so many in fact that Congress is attempting to pass a bill called the Dream Act which has bipartisan support. This law would recognize that many people were brought here as minors and should not be punished for their parents actions. It would grant conditional permanent resident status as a path towards citizenship. I'd also like to point out the not-so-subtle racism of your comments, for some reason you equate immigrants with people of color, namely those from Africa and South America. It is not surprising that recruitment for white supremacist organizations spiked during the public debate on immigration. You have no idea how difficult it is to live as an undocumented child in this country, the fear of deportation to a place that you barely know, if at all, is terrifying. Poverty makes it very difficult to afford the legal services required to hire a lawyer to address immigration status,and without status you can't get a good job...it is a vicious cycle. and the longer you wait the worse off you are. If you end up being ordered deported as a child it becomes nearly impossible to reverse the decision. Yet again you have no power over this because of your status as a minor. Before you start a thread attacking the ability of immigrants to obtain an education take the time to think what it would be like to have done nothing wrong yet have no power to control your destiny to improve your life through education. Allowing illegal immigrants to receive in state tuition doesn't even mean they will attend because without financial aid the expense is a burden for most immigrant families. If they do go they will need private loans, again very difficult for immigrants to receive. in any case the point is to have a more complicated understanding of the lives and experiences of people, i hope its possible for you to do so.

a primary reason people come to this country illegally is to give their children a better life.

seeing that the children are the end goal and motivation, while the parents illegal actions are the mechanism to reach this goal, it seems reasonable to take steps and reduce the primary motivation behind the illegal acts.

In case you are confused as to what precisely could be construed as callous in your position, perhaps you should consider that here you argue for punishing children based on the actions of their parents. Perhaps you are confused as to the definition of callous? If not please accept the fact that punitive measures taken against children as a way to prevent illegal immigration could be defined as callous. Also please tell me what you propose be done, perhaps Schoolchild Security task forces (aka SS) could raid kindergartens across the country rounding up undocumented children. Surely this would send a message to those who seek to leech off the system by providing a better life for their kids.

I've been thinking for about thirty seconds (a long time for me!) about "punishing" children for parents mistakes. A short reply:

1) there is no punishment - all coug is arguing for is withholding a benefit - namely in state tuition, because it is reserved for residents of the state. Are undocumented migrant workers residents of the state they seek said tuition reduction from? NO, therefore, no benefit should be dispersed. This is no punishment.

2) Do we punish children in any analogous way for the crimes of parents. SURE: when your mom kills your dad, your mom goes to jail, your dad is dead, and the state does little to help you. Your family is now infected with crime and disaster. If your dad robs a bank, then he goes to jail. You now don't have a dad . . . is the state PUNISHING you? NO!!! You just reap the horrors of your parents own mistakes. Don't blame the government; blame CRIMINAL parents.

Your argument - on this score - is laudable for its passion and compassion. Perhaps Coug sounds like he lacks empathy. However, for the above reasons, I am not persuaded, though I am sympathetic.

As far as I know, there is no way to be a citizen of a state and not a citizen of the U.S. The question of guaranteed rights doesn't turn on that, however. If a state recognizes that education is a fundamental right, instead of a state-granted privilege as the national Constitution does, then that state should grant that right, having recognized it as due to everyone. States can grant additional rights and privileges that the federal government doesn't recognize.

The way I understand it, to deprive someone of a right is a punishment. Thus, although looking at it from a federal perspective the lack of in-state tuition or an education are privileges that can be not granted without it being punitive, if the state decides that education is a right, then that right cannot be revoked without it being punitive.

1) there is no punishment - all coug is arguing for is withholding a benefit - namely in state tuition, because it is reserved for residents of the state. Are undocumented migrant workers residents of the state they seek said tuition reduction from? NO, therefore, no benefit should be dispersed. This is no punishment.

I think under AB 540, the California bill, undocumented immigrants are not granted in-state tuition on the basis of residency anymore but graduation from a California high-school, so it's no longer a "resident" benefit. For instance, California HS grads who attend undergrad outside California and establish residency in a another state are still eligible for in-state tuition in a UC school if they come back for grad school, regardless of citizenship.

As a side note, I had a brief conversation with someone about her friend who is attending law school as an illegal immigrant. Won't that come up on C&F at some point? I'm curious if anyone knows.

As far as I know, there is no way to be a citizen of a state and not a citizen of the U.S. The question of guaranteed rights doesn't turn on that, however. If a state recognizes that education is a fundamental right, instead of a state-granted privilege as the national Constitution does, then that state should grant that right, having recognized it as due to everyone. States can grant additional rights and privileges that the federal government doesn't recognize.

The way I understand it, to deprive someone of a right is a punishment. Thus, although looking at it from a federal perspective the lack of in-state tuition or an education are privileges that can be not granted without it being punitive, if the state decides that education is a right, then that right cannot be revoked without it being punitive.

If it's punitive, then what is it punishing?

Also, which state constitutions recognize education as a fundamental right? Don't many of them recognize through high school, but then not in college/beyond? I'm sure minnesota is that way, por example. Is there ANY state that doesn't? Does/Do this/these state/s have any undocumented migrant workers? If so, then do you admit that the argument for improper punishment of children for parents' wrongs shouldn't hold in said states?

Also, do you agree that when parents break the law, children often suffer either from the scarlet letter of being related to a criminal, possibly deprived of a parent, or even if the parent isn't caught, the kids could suffer from living with a drug addicted, murdering, violent, stealing parent . . . does the state have an obligation to rectify that to make every kids' upbringing equal? If so, is it punishment for me that another kid's upbringing was nicer than mine? Does the government owe me something for that?

Finally, doesn't the government become an accomplice to the crime of illegal immigration (is it a crime or something else? I really don't know for sure) by giving incentives for ppl to commit the crime. An an example: Wouldn't it be wrong for the govt to give out 100 dollar bills to people who do heroine or to people whose parents do heroine? I think it would be wrong. Thus, I think it is wrong of the government to incentivize this illegal activity. It's unfortunate that ppl's parents commit crimes and thus involve their kids in the suffering that results, but I'm not sure that justifies otherwise unjustifiable handouts.

If a state recognizes that education is a fundamental right, instead of a state-granted privilege as the national Constitution does, then that state should grant that right, having recognized it as due to everyone. States can grant additional rights and privileges that the federal government doesn't recognize.

If a state views an education as a fundamental right, does that include higher education or does that stop after the child has left high school? I'm not saying that we throw illegal immigrant children out of primary education (although they are using resources that belong to U.S. citizens and their children).

Further, I am not calling for the denial of a college education to illegal immigrants (whether or not a state views education as a fundamental right). The state can let them attend college (public or private), but they should not be given the in-state tuition rate at public universities.

If a state recognizes that education is a fundamental right, instead of a state-granted privilege as the national Constitution does, then that state should grant that right, having recognized it as due to everyone. States can grant additional rights and privileges that the federal government doesn't recognize.

If a state views an education as a fundamental right, does that include higher education or does that stop after the child has left high school? I'm not saying that we throw illegal immigrant children out of primary education (although they are using resources that belong to U.S. citizens and their children).

Further, I am not calling for the denial of a college education to illegal immigrants (whether or not a state views education as a fundamental right). The state can let them attend college (public or private), but they should not be given the in-state tuition rate at public universities.

Coug, would you be ok with it if your state said, "It's wrong for us to grant undocumented migrant workers in-state-tuition on the basis of residency. So, we have decided to pass a law giving them a free ride, because we see it as a significant state interest to get this population that "lives in the shadows" educated; and to give them equal access to the opportunities afforded other human beings in this state, said education will be necessary?"